In the news this morning, I was disheartened to read of Trumps (backed by Rand Paul and FOX News) rejection and harsh critique of Dr. Fauci. Economics and Science won’t ever seem to get along. Will this lead to the “darkest winter in modern history” (Dr Bright)?
Sort of goes along with this article. I suspect Fauci will be glad when this is over. I think his reply to Rand was exceptional and showed both his knowledge and his sense of place in the overall scheme of things. He is on my top 5 list of people I would invite to dinner.
I’ve only been observing from here in Canada, and I would agree. I deeply admire and respect Fauci’s response to Rand Paul. It was golden
A portion of sales go to the purchase of PPE for healthcare workers:
As much as I like the idea I’m disappointed that only $5 of the $25 purchase price is going to that good cause. Perhaps it would be better to just donate the $25 directly to that end?
Still, I love the idea.
All I got out of the blurb on CNN, as replayed on this site, is that Fauci said something that any one of us reasonably could have said — that is, it takes time to come up with a vaccine — but Trump was more optimistic. He has to be…“Cheerleader in Chief.” It goes with the territory. Any president — whether about to run for reelection or not — is bound to be a bit more optimistic about something that affects their administration than he/she would be were they not in the Oval Office. Also bad psychologically for the country/consumer confidence, etc., if you talk things down.
I think it is very dishonest at the end of the day to give people false hope which is not based upon good science.
Maybe …but they all do it. And I hear so many things about this pandemic that you get somewhat “hardened” to it all. Last night I listened to a group of normally rational people talking about a bill that was recently sent to the House and it supposedly says they will take your children and grandma and put them in concentration camps unless they get vaccinated for this virus. The whole stay-at-home thing has people a little edgy. It is no wonder that a president feels the need to be overly optimistic. BTW…I looked all over and could find nothing about any particular bill saying the government is attacking religion and developing camps. By comparison, Trump being overly optimistic is only a small thing. People just need to get back to work and have better things on their minds at this point.
I read your post too quickly and thought you were defending Fauci. I don’t think the cheerleader in chief function is nearly as important as defending American lives during a pandemic. But you can’t describe his actions as purely motivated to ‘raise people’s spirits’ when he is silencing the scientists most qualified to guide us through this mess and he is saying a lot things that just confuse people.
I think your response was to my first comment, rather than my second ?
Yes, that was the one where I thought you were sympathizing with Fauci at first.
But hopefully not in a manner that causes a spike and overtaxes the medical establishment.
Absolutely, Mark. No argument there. That was the motivation behind the sheltering movement to begin with — as I tried to explain the other night to some people who are now convinced that the government in general and the Democrat Party in particular is trying to crush religion and bring in communism with it. . I watched Fauci’s remarks online last night…also saw Rand Paul’s comments, and re-read some of what Trump has said…they all had something worthwhile (basically) to say. Trump’s assertions about children being less susceptible might be arguable. But I suppose it is reasonable to say that “we don’t know what we don’t know” about a new disease and to also presume that a child with COVID19 might have more of a fighting chance than an 80-year-old with multiple other health problems getting the disease – seems possible to me, at least… I would “go” with Fauci. His comments were perfectly reasonable. But there are other factors going forward. And most of them are unknowns. One is the oft-stated, or at least OCCASIONALLY stated, reality that the damage to the economy done by a large part of the populace being out of work, may be far worse than all the sheltering that is going on.
And presidents do have to be confident — or positive. If not, they are accused of adding to the problem, dashing the hopes of millions, being a Debbie Downer — or a Donald Downer, in this case.
And yesterday I learned that every summer we have one billion (with a B) people streaming through one community on their way to visit Yellowstone National Park. Seriously!! One out of seven people on this planet are going to stream through that gate this summer, using washrooms and port-a-potties and leaving their germs everywhere behind to be picked up and redistributed by others…and we are worried about what? schoolkids getting COVID?
As I said, we have too much time on our hands. We just need to wash our hands and go back to work. I am looking forward to the Collins-Keller discussion in a couple days.
Robin, a billion sounded a little high, so looked it up and it is a about 4 million annually. Still, a lot of grubby hands touch those handrails around Old Faithful. A billion would mean everyone in the USA visited Yellowstone 3 times last year!
It’s an internationally known spot…maybe the folks at the Chamber of Commerce there are a little overwhelmed at the thought of us tourists arriving soon !. They said 1,100,000 visits to Old Faithful every day. But they did say “B” for overall. numbers going thru the town there…Well, it IS quite busy!! But OK…
Typical Chamber of Commerce hyperbole, similar to “pastorally speaking…”. Of course a billion a year would about 2-3 million visitors a day, I bet their Chik FilA is really efficient!
Good point…not sure I saw a Chick Fil A…but there is enough around to feed people!! maybe not a million all at once…Have a good day…you are right, the Billion number is a bit high but…it is a popular place.
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.